I think we are getting closer the mark here. My feeling is that the Class E advocates are acting on behalf of a group who is afraid to call ATC for a clearance. They use the 'But I might get knocked back or delayed' as an excuse. It boils down to confidence and knowledge (ie, taking the time to research the required R/T) of how to operate in a controlled environment.
Some people on here bang on about delays or clearance denials 'this one time'. How about the hundreds that are issued daily through Class C to VFRs? I can't think of a time I have ever knocked back a VFR in Class C, whether it was into an international terminal area to land, a busy capital airport terminal area with terrain issues, or a very dubiously "radar covered" area sector surrounding a D tower.
Is it just the terry-towling brigade trying to get Class E so they don't have to use their radio to call ATC because they don't know how?
Cheers,
NFR.
PS. I don't use my real name on here for varied reasons. Many people know who I am and what my background and experience is -Dick is one of them (and I have asked him to keep it under his hat, which he has done, to his credit). My personal belief from working Class E and Class C is that, given the current traffic levels and the forseeable increase in the medium term, Class C protection can be provided for ALL airspace users for the same cost as Class E in the current setup of Class D towers.